Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In the very first claim thread it mentions contacting the claimant is encouraged by the court etc. I was thinking about contacting them and asking about a Tomlin order to put an end to all this, at least I'd be able to stop worrying and maybe get some sleep (currently 4.52am) 😴
    • Hi I'm looking for a bit of help to deal with a claim form from Hoist/ Cohen referencing an old Capital One account please. I have filled out the details below as requested and submitted an acknowledgement of service intending to defend.   In 2007 I sent a SAR and requested a copy of the original CCA from Cap One on this account.    In 2014 Lowells sent a claim form for the same account. I have a copy of a notice of allocation to the small claims track hearing and a copy of the front sheet of ack of service with intent to defend but I have no recollection of its outcome and there are no CCJs on my credit file.    Name of the Claimant Hoist Finance UK Holdings 2 Ltd   Date of issue – 5/11/2019   Date of issue 05/11/19 + 19 days = 24/11/2019 + 14 days to submit defence = 7/12/2019 (33 days in total)   Particulars of Claim This claim is for the sum of £294 arising from the Defendants breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement referenced Under no XXXXX. The defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a default notice issued pursuant to ss. 87(1) and 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant claims the sums due from the Defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd (EX CAPITAL ONE). Written notice of the assignment has been given. The Claimant claims 1. The sum of 294  2. Costs   What is the total value of the claim? £369   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC I received a letter of claim & income / exp forms.   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? yes   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? Not sure claim is for Credit card   When did you enter into the original agreement 2003   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement not sure   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files yes, as closed   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor. Assigned   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?  from HPH2 to HFUKH2L, I don't have anything from Cap One.   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes (2007) Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears” or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not sure, I’ve had letters from Robinson Way.   Why did you cease payments? illness and inability to deal with my debts, I had no money no job and my mental health was in a terrible state.   date of your last payment? 07/2014 paid to Robinson Way   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No (PPI and bank charges refunded)   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes   Do I send a CPR 31.14 next asking for the agreement, notice of assignment and the Default notice?   Thanks.
    • It states the charge as: 'did enter a compulsory ticket area without having with you a valid ticket. Contrary to Byelaw 17 (1) of the Transport for London Railway Bylaws Made under paragraph 26 of Schedule 11 to the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and confirmed under section 67 of the Transport Act 1962.' Then a brief statement of facts that the pass did not belong to me, and that I had stated it was due to financial reasons. It then contains information about making my plea and then the statement of the revenue officer. I am of course planning on pleading guilty before the cut off point and attending court (I'm hoping to be well enough to attend anyway). I'm just concerned about the consequences and if there is any point in trying to still reason with TfL now that court application costs are at least involved. I have debated getting a solicitor solely because of what I've read on the internet and what it says about ruined job prospects, I know it's probably scare tactics to get me to hire someone but it is the driving fear behind everything at the moment. 
    • You really MUST respond to the Singe Justice Procedure (SJP) notice and do so BEFORE the 'cut off' date.   Clearly, you will need to plead guilty and by doing so, you will benefit from having a one third discount in the amount of the fine issued.   You do not....I repeat NOT need to enlist the help of a solicitor and by pleading guilty, you will NOT be required to attend a hearing.   what exactly is stated on the charge sheet.    
  • Our picks

Filcin

Religious Discrimination is Legal

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1634 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

It seems you can't lawfully have religious beliefs any longer. Now you must put whatever anyone wants you to put on a cake or you end up in court.

 

Why must someone 'have' to believe in same sex marriage, it's wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems you can't lawfully have religious beliefs any longer. Now you must put whatever anyone wants you to put on a cake or you end up in court.

 

Why must someone 'have' to believe in same sex marriage, it's wrong.

 

It may be wrong but its legal, but it doesnt stop the individual to state that in their opinion they believe it to be wrong..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems you can't lawfully have religious beliefs any longer. Now you must put whatever anyone wants you to put on a cake or you end up in court.

 

Why must someone 'have' to believe in same sex marriage, it's wrong.

 

The individuals can hold their own beliefs.

The business can't discriminate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue here is that they provide a public service. It is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of sexuality. A religion or group of people cannot be allowed to pick and choose what part of the law they want to follow and what not too.

 

In this case THE BUSINESS discriminated.

 

To be frank, would you accept a pub or shop that had signs saying "Straights Only?"

 

IF you want to run a business then you have to abide by the law of the land you do business in. Period.

 

And it is not about "Believing in same sex marriage" it is about providing a service to anyone regardless of protected characteristic. IF a Bakery refused to make a wedding cake for a christian couple as the bakery staff do not "Believe in God" then the couple themselves rightfully so would have grounds to make the same complaint.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be frank, would you accept a pub or shop that had signs saying "Straights Only?"

 

Gladly, as frankly I'm getting fed up with these one sided laws. It's about time the 'normal' heterosexual started to be listened to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gladly, as frankly I'm getting fed up with these one sided laws. It's about time the 'normal' heterosexual started to be listened to.

 

 

 

On the contrary. I'd call these anti discrimination laws all inclusive. I have no idea what normal is, but until 1967 (I believe it was), heterosexuals were the only ones listened to, and it was long overdue that everyone should have the right to live as they choose and be heard.

 

 

Before you post any further, please acquaint yourself with the site rules.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no homophobic thoughts whatsoever, they can marry the bulldog next door for all I care, I just don't see why they make a law forcing others to agree and gagging them from expressing their views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, read the judgement

 

A person may indeed have an opinion and indeed express that opinion. HOWEVER a business cannot discriminate by refusing to serve someone due to a protected characteristic. A Bakery making a cake for a wedding does not make a statement. Refusing to do so, Does!

 

I am fed up of "oppressive groups" claiming victimization because they are being called out for their illegal activities. The owners could of legally got away with saying something like they do not feel it is right for same sex marriage to happen but will still make the cake to comply with the law. They chose the path they walked.

 

I am glad to see the members of ROI have decided to vote for equality.

 

And before you dare to state that heterosexuals are discriminated against, consider this.

 

1. Homosexuality predates the church and is considered part of the spectrum of normal behavior.

2. Marriage ALSO predates the church too!

3. When has it ever been illegal to be Heterosexual

4. When have people been beaten up or murdered or in some countries executed for being heterosexual

5. When have people been denied housing just because they are heterosexual

6. When have heterosexual people been afraid to display affection and love in public (Within reason of course)

7. When was the last time someone disowned their children for being heterosexual.

8. When was the last time you heard "Straight" being used as an insult in the playground or general chatter?

 

Your comments "ARE " Homophobic, maybe on the side of being naive, or ignorant.

 

You do not have to agree to how the law works, but if you do not like it, feel free to campaign against it to get the laws repealed. Personally I do not think a 16 year old should have sexual relations with a 50 year old, but thats my opinion, it is legal and I would defend their right to conduct their private legally compliant business.

 

In short, feel free to disagree, but the human rights of homosexuals are NOT yours to take!


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I new someone would make the homophobic accusation. Add that to a conversation, the same as kids and try to kill that conversation.

 

 

I could make the same accusation that you are heterophobic.

 

 

Do you think any of this would have happened if it had been a muslim bakery?

 

 

Tell me how not doing it is making a statement but doing it isn't ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its simple, not doing it, you are withdrawing a service due to a protected characteristic.

 

Doing it just means your business is treating everyone equally.

 

Had it been a Muslim bakery, it would still have happened if they had refused.

 

You have yet to address my questions above.

 

Where do you feel that heterosexuals have been persecuted?

 

As for me being hetero-phobic, not true, There are plenty of heterosexuals I love to bits. After all, I was a product of 2 of them :)


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gladly, as frankly I'm getting fed up with these one sided laws. It's about time the 'normal' heterosexual started to be listened to.

 

I find your views utterly wrong and have no place in this forum, who are you to decide what is normal ?!. male, straight, white, anglo-saxon ?

 

In the case you refer to the company offered a service and must by law offer it to all, imagine if we had bus drivers, train companies or pilots refusing to transport certain people due to their sexuality or race/colour.

 

In fact in this case, the company actually agreed to make the cake but then later changed its mind so would possibly also have breach of contract implications.

 

The cake shop owners are quite entitled to have their views BUT they ruin a business and cannot turn away people due to their sexuality/race/colour this is well established law in the rest of the UK, but many in NI do wish to hold onto somewhat outdated views it appears.

 

The practise of No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish signs ended here a long time ago, thankfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its simple, not doing it, you are withdrawing a service due to a protected characteristic.

 

Doing it just means your business is treating everyone equally.

 

Had it been a Muslim bakery, it would still have happened if they had refused.

 

You have yet to address my questions above.

 

Where do you feel that heterosexuals have been persecuted?

 

As for me being hetero-phobic, not true, There are plenty of heterosexuals I love to bits. After all, I was a product of 2 of them :)

 

Ha..Brilliant :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, read the judgement

 

A person may indeed have an opinion and indeed express that opinion. HOWEVER a business cannot discriminate by refusing to serve someone due to a protected characteristic. A Bakery making a cake for a wedding does not make a statement. Refusing to do so, Does!

 

I am fed up of "oppressive groups" claiming victimization because they are being called out for their illegal activities. The owners could of legally got away with saying something like they do not feel it is right for same sex marriage to happen but will still make the cake to comply with the law. They chose the path they walked.

 

I am glad to see the members of ROI have decided to vote for equality.

 

And before you dare to state that heterosexuals are discriminated against, consider this.

 

1. Homosexuality predates the church and is considered part of the spectrum of normal behavior.

2. Marriage ALSO predates the church too!

3. When has it ever been illegal to be Heterosexual

4. When have people been beaten up or murdered or in some countries executed for being heterosexual

5. When have people been denied housing just because they are heterosexual

6. When have heterosexual people been afraid to display affection and love in public (Within reason of course)

7. When was the last time someone disowned their children for being heterosexual.

8. When was the last time you heard "Straight" being used as an insult in the playground or general chatter?

 

Your comments "ARE " Homophobic, maybe on the side of being naive, or ignorant.

 

You do not have to agree to how the law works, but if you do not like it, feel free to campaign against it to get the laws repealed. Personally I do not think a 16 year old should have sexual relations with a 50 year old, but thats my opinion, it is legal and I would defend their right to conduct their private legally compliant business.

 

In short, feel free to disagree, but the human rights of homosexuals are NOT yours to take!

 

Aren't you forgetting the hatred towards unamarried mothers or mothers to be?

 

I don't feel Filcin is being 'Homophobic'. They have an opinion and you've just bullied them and exaggerated your view in a biased way!

 

It was a cake and it was a contract but it should never have gone to court just to prove a point against a relious belief. It was petty and childish and they could have gone elsewhere with ease.

 

Nothing is normal but a little respect goes both ways.

 

SabreSheep.. Unmarried mothers were put in asylums, workhouses or left destitute and were persecuted for being pregnant. They still are a looked over group and disowned, beaten or murdered even if they have been raped.

 

I'm fed up of groups acting the victim over petty issues to point score at the taxpayers expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People may care to take a look at the name of this site, CONSUMER Action Group, this was a case where an ordinary consumer who just happened to be gay was treated unfairly due to the views of individuals at the company in question, quite rightly we (as the CAG) and most right minded people should stand up for the consumer, as others have pointed out you cant run a business and choose who to serve or not, you simply cannot have a situation where someone walks to a shop or café or train service, etc and doesn't know whether the service in question is going to be available to him due to the views of staff at the company.

 

The law quite rightly believes this too and was upheld appropriately in this case. The cake shop owners are free to hold whatever their bizarre views they wish, they can worship pixies and goblins or believe in Santa BUT this must not involve refusing to serve customers on sexual or racial grounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aren't you forgetting the hatred towards unamarried mothers or mothers to be?

 

I don't feel Filcin is being 'Homophobic'. They have an opinion and you've just bullied them and exaggerated your view in a biased way!

 

It was a cake and it was a contract but it should never have gone to court just to prove a point against a religious belief. It was petty and childish and they could have gone elsewhere with ease.

 

Nothing is normal but a little respect goes both ways.

 

SabreSheep.. Unmarried mothers were put in asylums, workhouses or left destitute and were persecuted for being pregnant. They still are a looked over group and disowned, beaten or murdered even if they have been raped.

 

I'm fed up of groups acting the victim over petty issues to point score at the taxpayers expense.

 

When people stop acting in an unlawfully discriminating way these points will not need to be challenged in court at taxpayers expense. It was far form childish and very important that the point was made. It prevents "Religious belief" from being given carte blanc to unlawfully discriminate. Just as you say they could of gone somewhere else, the owners could quite easily have made the cake and said something along the lines " We do not believe you shoudl get married but the business shall still be more than happy to comply with your order"

 

THEY made the petty decision to refuse service which was in its own way disrespectful

 

As for exaggerating my view? feel free to do the research and you will find that these things *STILL* happen.

 

Regarding unmarried mothers. As you say their treatment was unacceptable and laws were put in place which ironically are now encased under the same single equality act.. Also as you point out that treatment USED to happen. Not sure we have workhouses anymore and not sure we send them to the asylums on the basis of their gender or if they are pregnant. Sex discrimination STILL does occur, but im guessing your attitude to women paid less than men would be to not be petty to challenge it and instead get another job.

 

As for me bullying Filcin, I don't think so, I made reasonable questions.

 

To paraphrase yourself "Im fed up of groups acting the victim over petty issues to try and have the right to discriminate at taxpayers expense."

 

Everyone has the right to free worship. However religion is not the state and the state set the laws. You are entitled to your opinion, but if acting on it breaks the law, that is where you cross the line. Otherwise had this case succeeded, it would of been a slippery slope for everyone. Can you imagine who else could be shielded from complying with the law on the basis of religious belief. None of us, even Filcin would want that can of worms opened.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who would think it right for a Christian or Muslim or whatever church, with strong beliefs on the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, to be forced to hold a marriage ceremony for a same sex couple?

 

Now I think that same sex couple, like everyone else, have the right to make their own lives however they see fit ....

as long as it doesn't negatively impact others lives, and gay, straight or whatever, no-one should be forced to serve others in ways that offend their own sensibilities. We can all take our business elsewhere.

Forcing service makes resentment, not compassion.

 

(LOL I just noticed that my spell checker flagged muslim (without capitalisation) as an error, but not christian)


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was a cake and it was a contract but it should never have gone to court just to prove a point against a relious belief. It was petty and childish and they could have gone elsewhere with ease.

 

Thin end of the wedge. Starts with a cake and ends with segregation. Extreme maybe, but where exactly do you draw the line?

 

Well said andydd.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Spock say 'The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many...?

Now we know bankers and politicians adhere to that belief, do we really want the list to grow?

 

Live and let live is a philosophy which can only come from within, and does need to be mutual.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So who would think it right for a Christian or Muslim or whatever church, with strong beliefs on the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, to be forced to hold a marriage ceremony for a same sex couple?

 

Now I think that same sex couple, like everyone else, have the right to make their own lives however they see fit ....

as long as it doesn't negatively impact others lives, and gay, straight or whatever, no-one should be forced to serve others in ways that offend their own sensibilities. We can all take our business elsewhere.

Forcing service makes resentment, not compassion.

 

(LOL I just noticed that my spell checker flagged muslim (without capitalisation) as an error, but not christian)

 

Again where do you draw the line?

This thinking was rife in the US with signs saying BLACKS ONLY or WHITES ONLY

 

What you propose is a step backwards.

IF you provide a public service, you abide by the laws of the state. PERIOD

 

I also remind you that "Marrage" predates the church.

 

Refusing service based on a protected characteristic is wrong and crosses the line. THAT breeds resentment and breeds further requirements for the state to intervene.

 

Also the needs of the few out number the needs of the many comment makes no sense. SOrry but that is a line of reasoning that can be used to oppress ANYONE. Stop stealing human rights from people you disagree with.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was making SabreSheep is that there was no need to launch into a personal rant at Filcin and giving them a historic guide to homosexuality!

 

Caro, it's not the thin end of the wedge as we are going forwards not backwards. As I said I think that respect should go both ways.

 

Qu’ils mangent de la brioche! violin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again where do you draw the line?

 

That also goes both ways

 

I also remind you that "Marrage" predates the church.

 

How can marriage in a church predate the church?

I'm not saying they shouldn't celebrate or mark their partnership, just that they should not be able to force others to celebrate it against their beliefs.

Where would that end?

 

I don't believe the same sex couples' rights should be impacted, but neither should that of the church (in this example) else the same sex couple (or their pressure groups) is imposing the same sort of forced behavior that they have MOSTLY rightly complained about for so long.

To use your words - where does it end.

 

YOU sabresheep are demonstrating the ones sided fanatical thinking and twisting of speech which causes these problems in all areas, not resolves them.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point I was making SabreSheep is that there was no need to launch into a personal rant at Filcin and giving them a historic guide to homosexuality!

 

Caro, it's not the thin end of the wedge as we are going forwards not backwards. As I said I think that respect should go both ways.

 

Qu’ils mangent de la brioche! violin.gif

 

We are only moving forwards as homophobic and ignorant views are challenged. The fact that a couple decided they could hide behind their religious beliefs to discirminate whilst giving offering apublic service is a BACKWARDS step. NOW lets consider what could happen if they were successful in court and it became legal to disciriminate if in the situation refusing to not discriminate contradicted your beliefs. Shall we look at say Sharia Law?

 

To endorce that act of discrimination would have been to give carte blanc to oppress anyone you felt like if you could interpret doing so was written into your religious code.

 

If one wants to start a debate they should not complain when views contrary to their opinions surface. Again, I offered points of discussion. And its not historic, some of it still happens in this country NOW so Id call that current affairs.

 

You keep saying respect should go both ways, yet continue to imply that that gay couple should have gone elsewhere. That is not respect both ways. Respect both ways looks like the suggestion I made. Respect is " I do not agree with what you are doing but I defend to my death the right for you to do it." And let us not forget. Being gay, black or a women is NOT A CHOICE.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That also goes both ways

 

 

 

How can marriage in a church predate the church?

I'm not saying they shouldn't celebrate or mark their partnership, just that they should not be able to force others to celebrate it against their beliefs.

Where would that end?

 

I don't believe the same sex couples' rights should be impacted, but neither should that of the church (in this example) else the same sex couple (or their pressure groups) is imposing the same sort of forced behavior that they have MOSTLY rightly complained about for so long.

To use your words - where does it end.

 

YOU sabresheep are demonstrating the ones sided fanatical thinking and twisting of speech which causes these problems in all areas, not resolves them.

 

Nope, I am not displaying fanatical thinking, I am arguing for human rights. Nor Am i twisting speech. I am mearly coutering your arguements with points that clearly makes you uncomfortable. Sorry if you do nto like the debate you find yourself in.

 

 

Now if we are going to discuss marriage we should do so properly. You should not twist this to "Marriage in a church"

Lets look at where marriage came from shall we.?

IN this country it predated the arrival of the christaian faith and was mainly used to cement alliances between powerful families etc. This institution of marriage also meant that the female was merely property.

The Arrival of Christianity saw this ritual changed. The problem is the Church in effect also ended up deciding what was right and what was wrong and enjoyed a powerful influence on how this country was run.

This meant that Marriage became part of the state mechanic.

 

The problem you have now is the church is no longer in the powerful position it once was. It has fallen out of favour and is out of touch. This is why attendance is falling. But instead of modenising to attune its views with the majority it instead focuses on playing the victim for loosing the right to oppress people it "does not disagree with"

 

Now ideally the situation here is to remove ALL LEGAL implications of marriage. Totally separate it from the machinery of state. If it only means something to the faithful then the faithful can do what they like with it. As long as people are not discriminated against in a practical way, I dont care. That is a discussion their followers can have if they want to change their religious beliefs. For claraty as long as there are no legal implications a religion can do what the hell it likes behind its doors. HOWEVER when serving the public like this couple, THEY MUST ABIDE BY THE LAW.

 

Where does this end?

 

Simple, you are free to hold your own personal beliefs. Or follow your religious codes in private. HOWEVER, when it comes to dealing with the public, you must abide by the law of state. If you do not like the law of the state, use the system to try and get support to change it.

 

 

Now please tell me where I am being one sided and fanatical and twisting speech.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if we are going to discuss marriage we should do so properly. You should not twist this to "Marriage in a church"

 

Marriage in a church was exactly the moral question I raised, which you have twisted into something else.

You even quoted me in post 20 here before ranting off at a tangent.

 

I'll copy again the exact words for you (no doubt to squirm away from again)

 

"So who would think it right for a Christian or Muslim or whatever church, with strong beliefs on the sanctity of marriagelink3.gif between a man and a woman, to be forced to hold a marriage ceremony for a same sex couple?"


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1634 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...